Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-18 Thread Paul Hammant
OK, so I don't think there's any interest in this beyond me :-( On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Paul Hammant wrote: > I don't really need Fossil to become an application server. I just need > it to handle CRUD over HTTPS on specific resources, and have configurable >

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-05 Thread Paul Hammant
I don't really need Fossil to become an application server. I just need it to handle CRUD over HTTPS on specific resources, and have configurable permissions for that. Though TH1 scripts exist, I'd not use them, nor anything that purports to be JSP/ASP application scripting model. I'd not need

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-04 Thread Warren Young
On Apr 4, 2017, at 11:24 AM, Paul Hammant wrote: > > > I have little need for such a thing myself, so I’m just throwing this idea > > out > > there for anyone who thinks it looks like a good itch to scratch. > > I do have a need for this class of use. My thread "Fossil as an

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-04 Thread Paul Hammant
> > > I have little need for such a thing myself, so I’m just throwing this idea > out there for anyone who thinks it looks like a good itch to scratch. > I do have a need for this class of use. My thread "Fossil as an app server" (nearly a week ago on this list) is in the same direction.

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-03 Thread Stephan Beal
On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 3:25 PM, Warren Young wrote: > On Apr 3, 2017, at 1:29 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > > > Commits can't be done without a checkout > > Given a way to ask Fossil over HTTP for the set of artifacts that makes up > $reference, where

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-03 Thread Warren Young
On Apr 3, 2017, at 1:29 AM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > Commits can't be done without a checkout Given a way to ask Fossil over HTTP for the set of artifacts that makes up $reference, where the latter is anything Fossil currently accepts in “fossil up $reference” you’ll

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-03 Thread Stephan Beal
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 11:38 PM, Warren Young wrote: > On Apr 2, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > > > a) that's essentially what the JSON API is > > …minus the lightweight Subversion-like client, of course. > > But, it’s good to know that most

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-02 Thread Warren Young
On Apr 2, 2017, at 2:48 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: > > a) that's essentially what the JSON API is …minus the lightweight Subversion-like client, of course. But, it’s good to know that most of the work is already done. > with the notable exception of missing blob support

Re: [fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-02 Thread Stephan Beal
On Sun, Apr 2, 2017 at 8:58 PM, Warren Young wrote: > In a conversation off-list, I had an idea that might solve several > existing problems. What if the current HTTP URL interface of Fossil were > expanded to be able to do everything that Fossil internally can do, such >

[fossil-users] REST API and client for same

2017-04-02 Thread Warren Young
In a conversation off-list, I had an idea that might solve several existing problems. What if the current HTTP URL interface of Fossil were expanded to be able to do everything that Fossil internally can do, such that it eventually implements REST API interface that is functionally equivalent